EU’s failed ‘engagement’ with Cuba’s Castro dictatorship has ramifications for all of Europe

“The time is always right to do what is right.” - Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.

Source: CubaBrief

The European Union (EU) and the Castro regime elevated whataboutism to the level of international agreements. The European External Action Service (EEAS), the European Union's diplomatic service's press release on the EU - Cuba human rights dialogue that was held on October 3, 2019 requires a suspension of disbelief to read it. The second sentence in the first paragraph states, "the dialogue provides a structured framework to discuss openly and in a constructive way the human rights situation in both Cuba and the EU and a platform to explore cooperation in multilateral fora on shared human rights challenges."

The EEAS press release also claimed that it "was preceded by a civil society seminar on 2 October, where representatives of Cuban and European civil society exchanged views in particular on the topics of combatting gender-based violence and on the protection of families."

This claim of the EEAS was contradicted by the Sweden based Civil Rights Defenders, a respected human rights organization that was founded in 1982 that over social media on October 2, 2019 reported: "Right now, a human rights dialogue between EU and Cuba is taking place in Brussels. All attending are approved by the Cuban gov, no independent civil society organisations present. Manuel Cuesta Morúa is going to Brussels despite not being invited."

Rosa María Payá in an open letter published by Civil Rights Defenders warned that "the position of the EEAS, combined with the fact that European governments abandoned their previous position, the EU Common Position on Cuba [brought into force] in 1996, that condemned human rights violations, demanded democratic reforms in Cuba and kept their embassies on the island open to opposition activists and members of independent civil society, but that [today's position] is used by the Cuban government to try to legitimize its actions."

Cuban dissident Cuesta Morua in a video posted by Civil Rights Defenders states that "since 2016 when the deal was signed between the European Union and Cuba the human rights situation has worsened." Interviewed in the Swedish publication, Aftonbladet, Manuel Cuesta Morúa explained that “this is the chance to demand democratic reforms, but it isn’t being taken.” The Cuban dissident also explained that Sweden will be missing an opportunity to demand democracy in Cuba, if the EU-Cuba deal is approved.

“This is the chance to demand democratic reforms, but it isn’t being taken” Manuel Cuesta Morúa @cuestamorua explains how Sweden misses opportunity to demand democracy in #Cuba, if the EU-Cuba deal is approved. @CRDLatin. IN SWE: https://t.co/31G2bFPRml

— Civil Rights Defenders (@crdefenders) October 3, 2019

Shared challenges work when values are shared, in this case democratic ones. This is not the case with the dictatorship in Cuba and the democratic community of nations of the European Union.

The European project is in crisis, and it is reflected today in its foreign policy and the values that it promotes that are in contradiction with those enunciated with its founding. The European Union’s fundamental values are supposed to be "respect for human dignity and human rights, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law." Reinterpreting the communist dictatorship in Cuba as a "one party" democracy is a betrayal of those values.

Yesterday, the EEAS press release explained that "both parties explored opportunities for closer EU-Cuba cooperation in multilateral human rights fora, such as at the Human Rights Council and the United National General Assembly Third Committee." This ignores that the Cuban government has played an active and negative role in these fora over the years. Here are but a few highlights from the past 15 years at the UN Human Rights Council:

• On April 15, 2004, when the UN Human Rights Commission decided by a single vote to censure Cuba for its human rights record, a Cuban human rights defender attending the session, Frank Calzon, was physically attacked by a Cuban diplomat.
• On March 28, 2008, the Castro regime’s delegation, together with the Organization of Islamic Congress, successfully passed resolutions that turned the UN special rapporteur on freedom of expression into an investigator into “abuses” of freedom of expression.
• On February 2, 2009, during the Universal Periodic Review of China, Cuban ambassador Juan Antonio Fernández Palacios recommended that China repress human rights defenders with more firmness.
• On May 28, 2009 amidst a human rights crisis in Sri Lanka the Cuban government's diplomats took the lead and successfully blocked efforts to amend a text to pressure Sri Lanka to improve humanitarian access to its camps.
• On March 17, 2014, at the UN Human Rights Council, Cuban diplomats defended the North Korean regime’s human rights record, and also negotiated with the European Union to guarantee that the North Korean dictator "would be off limits" before the International Criminal Court.
• On September 21, 2018, Cuban ambassador to the UN Pedro Luis Pedroso Cuesta, during the Universal Periodic Review on Cuba at the UN Human Rights Council, stated that “our country will not accept monitors. Amnesty International will not enter Cuba and we do not need their advice.”
• On October 16, 2018, Cuban diplomats led an “act of repudiation” at the UN to prevent a discussion on political prisoners in Cuba.

Cooperating with outlaw regimes in a multilateral forum such as the UN Human Rights Council or the Third Committee is to undermine those forums and institutions. It also demonstrates that democracy promotion is no longer a top concern. This has led to the question raised in some important quarters of whether or not "democracy support" is a core concern that defines EU geostrategic interests? It was once and could be again, but it is an open question today.

The European project over the past sixty one years beginning with the European Economic Community in 1958 and the formal naming of the European Union in 1993 with the Treaty of Maastricht was a project of economic and political integration between democratic nations. For much of that time it also served as a politically and economically united front against the neighboring Soviet Union. The objectives of a common foreign and security policy were articulated in the Treaty of Maastricht and finally fleshed out in the Lisbon Treaty in 2009.

With respect to Cuba, as mentioned earlier, the European Union established a Common Position in 1996 that was consonant with fundamental EU values:

“The objective of the European Union in its relations with Cuba is to encourage a process of transition to pluralist democracy and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as a sustainable recovery and improvement in the living standards of the Cuban people. A transition would most likely be peaceful if the present regime were itself to initiate or permit such a process. It is not European Union policy to try to bring about change by coercive measures with the effect of increasing the economic hardship of the Cuban people. The European Union considers that full cooperation with Cuba will depend upon improvements in human rights and political freedom”

This Common Position on Cuba was ended on December 12, 2016 when the European Union claimed to "open a new chapter" in relations with the Cuban dictatorship that dropped human rights as a condition for normalization. Under the pretext of "normal relations" Cuban dissidents and independent civil society are no longer welcome at events at their embassies, as they were under the old policy. Incidentally in the rest of Latin America the European embassies invite dissidents, members of the political opposition to their events. The Cuban government in Washington DC invites opponents of the US government to their embassy functions.

Under the old Common Position the European Union and its member states defended human rights and human dignity in Cuba creating spaces at their embassies where members of the opposition could engage regime officials, and the European Union recognized the efforts of Cuban democrats, awarding the Sakharov Prize to Oswaldo Payá in 2002 and the Ladies in White in 2005 while campaigning for the release of Cuban prisoners of conscience.

Under the old policy the Castro regime in Cuba could boycott government officials participating in European events where dissidents attended, and now with the new policy the Cuban government is boycotting both independent Cuban and European civil society organizations from participating in human rights dialogues and civil society seminars both in Cuba and in Europe. Things have gone in the wrong direction, and not only on Cuba.

In 2017, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, a high ranking center right politician, was not honoring one of the founders of the European project, individuals such as Adenaur, Churchill, and Mitterand, but was in Trier to honor Karl Marx, and celebrate the unveiling of a statue of the communist philosopher paid for by the communist regime in China.

There is a crisis in Europe, and it is both a crisis of values and actions. The European Union in honoring Karl Marx and his communist philosophy ignores the wisdom of one of the pioneers of the EU, Winston Churchill who in 1937 explained:

"There are two strange facts about these non-God religions. The first is their extraordinary resemblance to one another. Nazism and Communism imagine themselves as exact opposites. They are at each other’s throats wherever they exist all over the world. They actually breed each other; for the reaction against Communism is Nazism, and beneath Nazism or Fascism Communism stirs convulsively. Yet they are similar in all essentials."

The European Union needs to return to the ideas of the founding generation of the European project, and defending human dignity, human rights, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law in both word and deed. Rosa María Payá, (daughter of the 2002 Sakharov Laureate) and promoters of the initiative Cuba Decide are calling on the European Union to once again do the right thing in Cuba:

"...Cooperate with the independent Cuban press and civil society as in any other country; that is, invite members of civil society to formal discussions on the implementation of the Agreement, contribute to the financing of civil society organizations, invite independent journalists to press conferences, and publicly denounce politically motivated human rights violations. The EEAS must also make it clear that there will be no financial contributions for Cuban official organizations or state agencies as long as the Cuban government does not publicly support [democratic reforms]."

Mohandas Gandhi observed that “happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony,” and it is time for the members of the European Union to embrace the values they claim, speak for them and act on them. Changing course on Cuba would be a good first step to turning the tide on this European crisis.

UN expert and Maduro apologist Alfred de Zayas claims progress in Venezuela but the facts say otherwise

Human rights expert claims progress in social sector in Venezuela as children die of hunger and dissidents are tortured.

On December 28, 2017 the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights announced that Alfred de Zayas, the UN’s Independent Expert on the Promotion of a Democratic and Equitable International Order "praised the Government of Venezuela for introducing a series of measures in line with recommendations he made after a recent mission to the country."

The Maduro regime in Venezuela taking a page out of the Castro playbook released some dissidents who had been arbitrarily detained to generate a positive response from the visiting dignitary. Independent Expert de Zayas claimed that "this constitutes a sign of movement towards national reconciliation and demonstrates that dialogue bears fruit." Unfortunately, the larger trends in 2017 in Venezuela paint a very different picture.

On May 18, 2017 The Miami Herald reported that it had a secret recording of a Venezuelan general advocating for the use of snipers against street demonstrators "in the future."

On August 30, 2017 the UN Human Rights Office found that "[e]xtensive human rights violations and abuses have been committed in the context of anti-Government protests in Venezuela and point to 'the existence of a policy to repress political dissent and instill fear in the population to curb demonstrations.'
  On November 29, 2017 Human Rights Watch along with Foro Penal (Penal Forum) published "Crackdown on Dissent  Brutality, Torture, and Political Persecution in Venezuela" that documented how regime opponents, once detained, have been subjected "to abuses ranging from severe beatings to torture involving electric shocks, asphyxiation, and other techniques."  Report was "based on in-country research, documents 88 cases involving at least 314 people who were victims of serious human rights violations during the crackdown between April and September 2017." These practices were carried out across Venezuela "by different security forces and armed pro-government groups known as colectivos in Caracas and 13 states—Anzoátegui, Aragua, Carabobo, Barinas, Bolivar, Lara, Mérida, Miranda, Monagas, Sucre, Táchira, Vargas, and Zulia."

Venezuela in 2016 had the third recorded most violent death rate in the world according to the 2017 Small Arms Survey Report.

On December 10, 2017 Venezuelan strong man Nicolas Maduro announced that main opposition parties would be banned from participating in the 2018 presidential elections.

"Since the beginning of [2017], more than 130 opposition activists were murdered and more than 500 had been arbitrarily imprisoned [in Venezuela]" reported the European Parliament. 
 On December 17, 2017 The New York Times reported that  despite Venezuela having the larges oil reserves in the world, Venezuelan children are dying of hunger. 

Despite all the above Alfred de Zayas in a December 12, 2017 statement argued that"[p]rogress in the social sector in Venezuela and Ecuador, consistent with the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, should be more generally known and recognized."

On December 10, 2017 the United Nations began a year long effort to honor and celebrate the 70th anniversary in 2018 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein recognizes that “we should be under no illusions: the legacy of the Universal Declaration is facing threats on many fronts.”

Experts such as Alfred de Zayas are an internal threat to this legacy because of their legitimizing of systematic human rights violators and corruption of the monitoring process against these regimes. If the UN human rights system is to survive and remain relevant these so-called "experts" need to go.

This make me sick: @UNHumanRights tweets praise for oppressive #Venezuela regime jailing dissidents & whose failed policies are causing babies to starve.
Their Cuban-backed expert "has praised the Government of Venezuela for introducing a series of measures..." Shame on you, @UN! https://t.co/6xOV7uU24g

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) January 2, 2018

Human Rights Decade Long Decline Worldwide: IACHR in Crisis

#IACHRinCrisis: The latest blow to human rights worldwide

 
 Human rights and democracy have been in retreat worldwide for the past decade. Between 2006 and 2016 there has been a steady decline in global liberty and human rights. The Associated Press reported that the Obama administration "is blaming a global crisis in governance as well as atrocities committed by non-state actors for a decline in human rights standards around the world." 

Now the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, a pioneering regional human rights organization founded in 1959 may be drastically scaled back or could even shut down due to a lack of support in the Americas if present trends continue. The attacks on regional human rights organizations in the Americas have been ongoing for years. An important highlight was Venezuela rejecting the American Convention on Human Rights and pulling out of the Inter-American Court  in 2012. Now this financial crisis which in reality is a human rights crisis in the Americas exposes the hollowness of national commitments in this hemisphere towards human rights. The United States, unfortunately, has not been immune to these trends.

Severe Financial Crisis of the IACHR Leads to Suspension of Hearings and Imminent Layoff of Nearly Half its Staff

IACHR Press Release

May 23, 2016

Washington, D.C. - The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) is going through a severe financial crisis that will have serious consequences on its ability to fulfill its mandate and carry out its basic functions. The Commission deeply regrets having to report that on July 31, 2016, the contracts of 40 percent of its personnel will expire, and at this time the Commission does not have the funds—or the expectation of receiving the funds—to be able to renew them. The Commission is also very sorry to report that it has been forced to suspend the visits it had planned for this year, as well as its 159th and 160th sessions, which had been scheduled for July and October.

The IACHR is alarmed by the fact that this situation will result in the dismantling of areas essential to its mandate. The IACHR is also distressed for the victims, petitioners, and civil society organizations that had planned to participate in hearings, working meetings, and other forums scheduled for the October session. The IACHR also expresses its deep concern because the suspension of sessions has a direct impact on the Commission’s capacity to make progress in processing complaints of human rights violations, since it is during these sessions that the Commissioners analyze, debate, and approve reports on petitions and cases.

Moreover, it is disturbing that thousands of victims of human rights violations will be left unprotected. The total dismantling of some work teams and the cutbacks mean that it is inevitable that the procedural backlog the Commission had been trying to reduce will increase again and will reach a point where it is incompatible with the right of access to justice. The IACHR also deeply regrets having to face an imminent situation in which it could lose valuable employees who have worked tirelessly for the rights of victims and have brought a sense of duty and devotion to the cause of human rights.

In the last few months and weeks, the IACHR and its Executive Secretariat have tried its best to confirm donations that had been previously talked, but unfortunately these did not succeed. The IACHR will continue to make every effort within its power to turn this situation around immediately, to prevent the loss of 40 percent of its staff and to be able to reschedule its sessions, visits, and all the other activities planned for 2016. To this end, the Inter-American Commission calls on the member countries, observer countries, and other potential donors to make urgent financial contributions that can be immediately available.

To avert this dire situation, the IACHR would need to receive funds, or at least commitments in writing for donations, before June 15.

Beyond the immediate financial crisis, the Inter-American Commission suffers from a structural, systematic lack of funds that must be addressed and resolved. There is a deep discrepancy between the mandate the Member States of the Organization of American States (OAS) have given the IACHR and the financial resources they allocate to it. The regular budget of the IACHR this year is less than 5 million dollars, which amounts to $0.005 per person in the hemisphere per year. The staff of the Commission financed by the OAS regular fund consists of 31 people; in other words, it has fewer employees than countries under its jurisdiction. The other 47 employees are financed with donations, which can be unstable and unpredictable, as the current crisis shows.

In the last two decades, the Commission has made ongoing efforts with the OAS Member States to secure a budget that would enable it to work effectively to fulfill its mandate. As a result of these efforts, the OAS General Assembly has approved a number of resolutions expressing a commitment to address the situation; however, these have not been reflected in a significant increase in resources. While the Council of Europe earmarks 41.5 percent of its budget to the promotion and protection of human rights, the OAS earmarks 6 percent of its budget to the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights.

 In this regard, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights strongly urges the OAS Member States to take on their responsibility to the inter-American Human Rights System. The IACHR hopes that the next OAS General Assembly, which will be held in June, will adopt a historic and far-reaching decision, one that reflects the States’ commitment to the defense of human rights in the region. This means radically increasing the budget of the OAS regular fund and allocating to the IACHR and the Inter-American Human Rights System in general the resources needed to fulfill the mandate the States themselves have handed down. It is essential, imperative, and urgent for the States to adopt a sustainable solution to this serious, chronic problem and demonstrate their commitment to the respect and guarantee of human rights with deeds and not just words.

The IACHR expresses its firm commitment to continue to work in the fulfillment of its functions, inspired by the words of the American Convention on Human Rights, which states that “the ideal of free men enjoying freedom from fear and want can be achieved only if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his economic, social, and cultural rights, as well as his civil and political rights.”

A principal, autonomous body of the Organization of American States (OAS), the IACHR derives its mandate from the OAS Charter and the American Convention on Human Rights. The Inter-American Commission has a mandate to promote respect for human rights in the region and acts as a consultative body to the OAS in this area. The Commission is composed of seven independent members who are elected in an individual capacity by the OAS General Assembly and who do not represent their countries of origin or residence.